But first the latest climate scare to be published on 9 November - that "Greenhouse gases have contributed to a gradual warming of the ecologically-fragile Arctic region, causing massive climate changes, including melting glaciers and sea ice, according to a
soon-to-be-released environmental study", and the rest of the article here.
When our ABC reported this on Classic FM a few days ago while driving to work, the news-reader mentioned that this will cause sea levels to rise - this jollied my day thereafter, as it reinforced my view that the ABC remain scientific illiterates.
The Arctic Ice cap is "SEA ICE" which "FLOATS" on the sea, and if it all melts the sea level will not be raised 1 micrometer - and you can test this yourself by filling a glass with ice-cubes and then filling it with water till the level reaches the lip of the glass. If this theory is correct and your ice-cubes melt, then the water will overflow the glass. If the water doesn't, then the theory is wrong.
So if the Arctic ice melts, sea levels will not rise. Fact.
And of course there are no glaciers at the North Pole, which is combined with another totally erroneous statement "causing massive climate changes" which incidentally have not yet been observed but such is modern journalism. In order to sell advertisements in newspapers, the bits between the ads need to be controversial. A disaster a day keeps the sales up per day, it seems, and the climate changers are very adept at using the global media to advertise their myth of global warming!
The UN IPCC bases its global-warming scare on the now totally debunked Hockey Stick, an artifice which amazingly made the Medieval Warming period disappear from history, as well as the Maunder Minimum, so it might be interesting to look at a recent world map drawn by the Chinese in the late 14th Century (or early 15th).
It is the Di Virga Map recently discovered by the team at 1421 which clearly shows the northern coastline of Siberia from Norway to the Bering Straights. It is a map compiled before any of the European maritime Nations started discovering the world, so one is immediately intrigued by the fact that in order to map this northern Siberian coast, ships must have add easy access to that coast. This suggests that perhaps the arctic ice cover was far less than what it is now.
(The map is centred on the old city of Samarkand in Uzbekistan, and attributed to the famous Chinese Astronomer Ullubeck - spelling is problematical, depending on which source one reads but the 1421 site summarises it for those interested in facts).
This is a recent satellite image of the northern cryosphere with lots of interesting graphs at the top of the page, which suggests there is more ice now than there was in the time of Ullubeck, and it is fairly obvious that the Siberian Coastline today is under snow, (even during summer?).
What this means is that the arctic ice cover is probably a recent development dating from the middle 15th century, and its present melting, if it is at all, nothing more exciting than the earth returning to the more balmy days of the Medieval Warm period.
The problem, as Keith Windschuttle has shown, is that the academic left have a disconcerting habit of fabricating history, not from malice aforethought but from an incomplete understanding of the facts, and now it seems this proclivity has been extended to some areas of climate science where the Hockey Stick caused the disappearance of the Medieval Warming period from history.
Of course in Galileo's day mainstream scientific authority asserted that the sun went around the earth, and that the earth was flat. Today that same authority asserts that man-made CO2 emissions is causing global warming. Both are myths, of course.
Except that all the satellite monitoring of the atmosphere temperature have not supported this mythological prediction and a key piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics, writes UCAL physicist Richard Muller here.
These are called scientific facts, unpalatable as they may be for global warmers and outsiders.
The redoubtable Professor John Brignell recently pointed out in his Global Warping Post, that sound science has demolished the Hockey Stick and his comment is reproduced here - Global "Warping" written on July 30, 2004 - (I missed it initially because your lowly scribe was out somewhere in the remote Kimberley Region of Western Australia exploring for diamonds when it was posted).
"In a midday presentation on July 28th the BBC broadcast a television programme called Global Warning (the first of three). It was possibly the most one-sided piece of blatant propaganda that has ever been transmitted in Britain in time of peace. It presented the global warming myth as an unmitigated horror story. There was not one reasonable balanced statement in the whole farrago. Outrageous lies were presented
as facts (carbon dioxide is the commonest greenhouse gas, the atmosphere acts as a blanket, scientists overwhelmingly agree etc.) The two "experts" were Sir Crispin Tickell, who is credited with inventing the whole scam, and Sir David King, who is challenging for Michael Meacher's title as the most embarrassing Briton.
His latest escapade was to flounce out of an international conference like some overblown Prima Donna, because the organisers refused to censor contributions from reasoned opposition, even after sustained bullying by the Foreign Secretary. This man has the audacity to call himself a scientist. He puts his cards on the table by calling the
When you consider the comprehensive way in which the "evidence" for the global warming hypothesis has been blown out of the water by recent genuine scientific analysis, it all takes on the quality of a mediaeval nightmare, like The Inquisition.
Out rolled the doom-laden claims - more floods, droughts, forest fires, sunburn, drowning Maldives (do the sums, it is the calculus of extinction), Earth losing the battle with its polluted environment, the USA in a state of denial (but China is quite innocent!). We had other old favourites , such as the Hadley super computer and the egregious David Viner. He earned a holiday on the Spanish beaches for a ten second
cameo; for this was a lavish production. Quite unnecessarily it was presented live from the Gobi Desert, Greenland (forgetting, of course, the fertile time of Eric the Red in the Mediaeval Warm Period), Alaska etc. Shrinking Glaciers, run-of-the-mill erosion and other random events were all ascribed to the dreaded carbon dioxide.
Let us forget the fact that it is essential to life on Earth, like the Greenhouse Effect.
Lord Reith, the illustrious creator of the finest broadcasting organisation in the world, must be, as the cliché has it, spinning in his grave.
Professor John Brignell is a Professor Emeritus at Southampton University.
A looming economic, let alone ecological disaster is "Wind Power" which FIN journalist Trevor Sykes comments on here and you need to be a registered FIN subscriber to read it, of course. Trev shows that Windpower is nothing but a lot of hot air, much like that expelled by proponents of global warming.
German experience showed that wind turbines need 80% of their generating capacity backed up by conventional power stations, since wind power is too unreliable as a source of energy. In fact wind power is about 11% efficient, and we also start to discover that the political left not only cannot predict elections, (The last two are dismal failures for them) but they also know little about the economics of energy either, since it now transpires that wind-power is fast becoming an economic disaster,
let alone an ecological one in the large numbers of birds that are massacred by the blades. And as Trev shows, these wretched wind machines, because of their reliance on hydrocarbon fueled backup power stations, will not decrease emission of CO2, erroneously termed a pollutant, as hoped for by replacing hydrocarbon fueled plants with wind power.
More Global Warming opposition.
William Kininmonth has published a new book "Climate Change - a Natural Hazard" and it is discussed here in the Weekend Inquirer edition of the Oz.
Kininmonth is another scientist who dares to disagree with the global warming scare, and his book is on the must read list. However I suspect it will be placed on the Green Index of banned publications, to join Bjorn Lomborg's book "The Sceptical Environmentalist".
It seems global warming advocates world-wide share a tendency of ignoring boring contradictory facts of a scientific kind, as your lowly scribe has discovered recently from some hot air directed at him from outside.
A comment by Owen Outsider that most scientists believe in anthropogenic global warming is easily refuted by Physcist James Marusek here.
Marusek has compiled an extensive body of evidence refuting the assertions by global warmers, which I won't list it here but leave it to our gentle readers to inform themselves at their leasure of the false claims made by global warmers. The evidence is of the overwhelming kind.
I must add one fact - the principal greenhouse component is water vapour, not CO2. Water vapour accounts for over 95% of the effect, but is omitted from the armoury of the global warming weapons because climate science has been unable able to model water vapour satisfactorily and an excellent summary is linked here
Another problem is figuring out how billions of tonnes of water remain suspended in the atmosphere, since invoking gravity and atmospheric turbulence doesn't seem to work too well. Perhaps another force is in play.
The various weekly media reports on climate change and global warming show that Global Warmers have an acute sense of how to manipulate the media by pandering to its daily fix of bad news. After all bad news and disasters sell news papers as Prof Derr writes here under "Strange Science" .
This suggests that global warming proponents have an excellent grasp of how to have their views publicised which is oddly at variance with Owen the Outsider's concluding comment. Rather it seems the climate sceptics have a hard time getting their views published.
Another concise summary of the global warming argument is published here and
should settle the argument once and for all, but you will not read it in the mainstream media, though.
The following conclusion is made:
"The man-made global warming hypothesis is far from being confirmed by Observations, many of which suggest that it is false. Environmental daydreamers try to make it seem axiomatic that imaginary dangers of this warming should be remedied without waiting for proof. In fact, they ask that the scientific uncertainty should become a basis for worldwide regulation, which may enormously burden the people of the world, especially in developing countries. F.B. Cross, professor of business
regulation at the University of Texas, warned that "the precautionary principle is deeply perverse in its implications for the environment and human welfare." 94 To fulfil their dreams, however, environmentalists are ready to pay any costs: to impoverish entire nations and thus endanger the environment; to destroy the industry created by the toil and sweat of their forefathers: and to strangle our civilization. It is astonishing how easily and credulously a large part of society, exposed to concentrated media manipulation, has accepted the global warming mythology. One can understand the psychological and social reasons for this acceptance. However, the actions of the United Nations Organization and many governments, leading the Earth’s community into an economic and civilizational disaster, on the ground of a wanton specter, do not seem responsible. Is it perhaps too much to ask politicians to act reasonably, instead of for selfish, short-term interests?"
Sometimes Global warmers have outbursts similar to volcanic eruptions where the latest volcanic eruptions are logged. A good description (bit technical though) is here .
Not much mention of volcanic eruptions is made in the media because volcanoes have a far greater effect on the composition of the earth's atmosphere than humanity. Volcanoes are, of course, an embarrassment for global warmers because apart from being unpredictable, volcanoes also pump an extraordinary amount of "pollutants" into the earth's atmosphere. Pollutants?
And are volcanoes factored into any climate models? They should be, but how? Climate is indeed complex and the interplay of many variables, most of which we don't really understand, and of which the most important is electricity or plasma, which is understood even less than volcanology.
And finally the depeleted uranium scare - and what is depleted uranium?
"Depleted uranium results from the enriching of natural uranium for use in nuclear reactors. Natural uranium is a slightly radioactive metal that is present in most rocks and soils as well as in many rivers and sea water. Natural uranium consists primarily of a mixture of two isotopes (forms) of uranium, Uranium-235 (U235) and Uranium-238 (U238), in the proportion of about 0.7 and 99.3 percent, respectively. Nuclear reactors require U235 to produce energy, therefore, the natural uranium has to be enriched to obtain the isotope U235 by removing a large part of the U238. Uranium-238 becomes DU, which is 0.7 times as radioactive as natural uranium. Since DU has a half-life of 4.5 billion years, there is very little decay of those DU materials." Link here
Except that as usual the greenies are scare - mongering the issue, as this report shows, and further comments are here .